Ontario Severance

Non-Competition — Ontario Employment Law

70 casesDecisions from 1914–2026

About Non-Competition

In Ontario, the legal landscape surrounding workplace non-competition underwent a massive transformation in late 2021. For decades, employers frequently attempted to restrict departing workers from joining rivals or launching similar businesses. Today, under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA), entering into a non-compete agreement with an employee is generally prohibited by law. This legislation recognized that broad barriers to mobility unfairly restrict workforce participation and stifle economic growth.

However, the statutory ban on non-competition is not absolute. The ESA outlines two primary exceptions. First, employers can still use non-competes for "chief executive" roles—often referred to as C-suite executives, such as Presidents, Chief Financial Officers, and Chief Information Officers. Second, non-competition agreements remain valid in the context of the sale of a business, provided the seller becomes an employee of the purchaser immediately following the transaction.

For employment contracts signed prior to October 25, 2021—the date the ban took effect—the ESA prohibition does not apply retroactively. Instead, legacy agreements are governed by strict common law principles. Ontario courts view restrictive covenants in employment as a "restraint of trade" and presumptively unenforceable. To enforce a pre-existing non-compete, an employer faces a steep uphill battle: they must prove the restriction is entirely reasonable regarding its timeframe, geographic territory, and the scope of prohibited activities. As demonstrated by numerous legal rulings, courts will not rewrite an overly broad clause to make it fair; if it is ambiguous or too restrictive, the entire non-compete is generally struck down.

It is also critical to understand that even without a written agreement, certain high-ranking or vulnerable roles carry inherent obligations. "Key employees" or corporate directors may owe a fiduciary duty to their former employer at common law. This duty can prevent them from actively sabotaging the former employer, soliciting established clients, or usurping active corporate opportunities for a period post-resignation, serving as a functional, temporary non-compete.

Determining where the line is drawn between fair market competition and an illegal breach of duty relies heavily on the specific chronology of your employment and the exact nature of your role. Because these disputes can result in severe financial penalties or court injunctions locking you out of a new job, having a legal professional review your distinct circumstances is highly recommended before making your next career move.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are non-compete clauses illegal in Ontario?

Yes, for the vast majority of employees. Under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, employers are prohibited from entering into non-compete agreements with employees on or after October 25, 2021. Any such agreement signed after this date is void, unless you fall under a specific statutory exception.

What happens if I signed a non-competition agreement before the 2021 ban?

Agreements signed before October 25, 2021, are not automatically invalidated by the ESA. However, they are subjected to strict scrutiny under common law. If the geographic scope, time limit, or restriction on activities is deemed overly broad or vague by a judge, the clause will be declared unenforceable.

Who qualifies for the 'executive' exception under the ESA?

The ESA exempts individuals holding chief executive positions. This includes titles like President, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Operating Officer (COO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Chief Information Officer (CIO), Chief Legal Officer, Chief Human Resources Officer, or any comparable chief executive role.

Can I still be stopped from taking my former employer's clients if the non-compete is void?

Yes. A non-competition ban prevents you from working in the same industry as a rival, but it does not invalidate non-solicitation clauses. Your former employer can still legally prohibit you from actively poaching their clients, customers, or other employees.

What is a fiduciary duty in the context of competing?

Even without a contract, senior management or 'key employees' inherently owe a fiduciary duty of loyalty to their former employer. This common law doctrine means they cannot unfairly exploit corporate opportunities they learned about during their employment or unfairly sabotage the company immediately after resigning.

When should I contact a lawyer about a non-competition dispute?

You should promptly initiate a consultation with an employment lawyer if you receive a cease-and-desist letter from your former employer, or if you are a C-suite executive attempting to negotiate a safe exit to join a rival company. Ignoring legal threats regarding competition can result in expensive injunctions.

Common Scenarios

  • A mid-level software developer who signed an employment contract in 2023 is offered a role at a direct competitor. Their current employer points to a non-compete clause in their contract, but because the contract was signed after October 2021 and the employee is not a C-suite executive, the clause is void under the ESA.
  • A Chief Financial Officer resigns to join a rival tech firm. Because she falls under the executive exception of the ESA, the carefully drafted six-month non-compete clause she signed remains legally binding and enforceable.
  • A senior sales manager with a contract dating back to 2018 accepts a job with a competitor. The former employer tries to enforce the old non-compete, but a court strikes it down because the geographic restriction broadly covers 'all of North America,' making it an unreasonable restraint of trade.
  • An entrepreneur sells their local logistics company and, as part of the commercial sale transaction, signs an agreement not to open another logistics business within 100 kilometers for three years. This non-compete remains highly enforceable as it is tied to the sale of a business.

What You Should Know

  • Always check the date on your employment agreement; if a non-competition clause was signed after October 25, 2021, and you are not an executive, it is structurally invalid in Ontario.
  • Do not confuse your right to compete with the right to take property. Even if a non-compete is void, you are still strictly prohibited from taking customer lists, proprietary software, or confidential employer information to your new job.
  • Be aware that courts generally apply the doctrine of 'severability' strictly in employment contexts. If the employer's non-compete radius is unreasonably large, a judge will strike the whole clause out rather than shrinking it down to a fair size.
  • If you hold a senior leadership position, do not assume you are completely free to compete immediately upon resignation; common law fiduciary duties may still silently restrict your actions.
  • If a prospective new employer asks you to sign an employment contract containing a non-compete, politely request the clause be removed if you aren't an executive, or secure independent legal advice to assess its enforceability before signing.

Featured Cases

Bellwether Investment Management Inc. v. Harbourfront Wealth Management Inc.

2026 ONSC 3622 (CanLII) · 2026-05-19

Enforceability of Non-Compete & Non-Solicit Clauses

This interlocutory proceeding addresses the enforceability of non-solicitation and non-competition clauses in an employment agreement. The court found a strong prima facie case that the defendant breached these restrictive covenants by soliciting clients and employees, leading to the issuance of an injunction. Additionally, a show cause hearing was ordered regarding alleged contempt of court for violating the interim injunction.

interlocutory injunction non-competition non-solicitation restrictive covenants

Green Life Inc. et al. v. 24K Maple Supply Inc. et al.

2025 ONSC 7356 (CanLII) · 2025-12-05

Injunction Refused: Expired Non-Compete & Confidentiality

This interlocutory motion concerned an application for an injunction to enforce confidentiality obligations and restrict competition, where the underlying non-competition clauses had expired. The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test, finding no serious question to be tried regarding the confidentiality of pricing and stock information which was largely public, and determined that damages were an adequate remedy. The motion was dismissed as the balance of convenience favoured the respondents and the relief sought would effectively shut down the competing business.

confidentiality employment contract interlocutory injunction non-competition restrictive covenants

One World Logistics Group Corp. v. S.

2025 ONSC 3518 (CanLII) · 2025-06-11

Interim Relief: Non-Compete vs Confidentiality in Employment

This is an interlocutory proceeding concerning interim injunctive relief to enforce restrictive covenants in an employment agreement. The court declined to grant interim relief for the non-competition clause due to its broad scope and questionable enforceability, but granted interim orders enforcing confidentiality obligations and requiring the provision of login codes.

confidentiality employment contract interim relief non-competition

Riva Plumbing Limited v. F.

2025 ONSC 3219 (CanLII) · 2025-05-29

Fiduciary Duties & Non-Compete: Riva Plumbing v. F.

This case addresses breaches of fiduciary duties and non-competition agreements by a former director and duties of good faith by employees who planned a competing business. The court found no breach of fiduciary or non-compete obligations due to lack of evidence of competition or misuse of confidential information. Additionally, the court awarded pro-rated bonuses to employees who resigned before the fiscal year-end, determining the bonuses were integral to compensation.

bonus entitlement fiduciary duties good faith non-competition

1000264228 Ontario Incorporated, et al v. K.

2024 ONSC 4518 (CanLII) · 2024-01-08

Enforcement of Non-Competition Covenants

This case involves a dispute over non-competition and non-solicitation covenants, likely arising from an employment or executive relationship. The plaintiff sought an injunction to enforce these restrictive covenants against the defendant, alleging breach of contract.

injunction non-competition non-solicitation restrictive covenants

Home Coffee Solutions Ltd. v. A.

2023 ONSC 6772 (CanLII) · 2023-12-01

Non-Competition Injunction: Balance of Convenience

An interlocutory application for an injunction concerning a non-competition agreement.

employment contract interlocutory injunction non-competition restrictive covenants

Wellsky Corporation et al. v. M.

2022 ONSC 4124 (CanLII) · 2022-07-13

Former Employee: Non-Compete Injunction Dismissed

This interlocutory motion involved a former employee accused of breaching fiduciary duties and misusing confidential information in violation of non-competition and non-solicitation clauses. The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test and dismissed the plaintiffs' motion for an injunction due to a lack of evidence regarding irreparable harm or the balance of convenience favoring the defendant.

confidential information fiduciary duties interlocutory injunction non-competition

Revel Realty Inc. v. C. et al

2022 ONSC 3372 (CanLII) · 2022-06-28

Revel Realty v. C.: Non-Competition Clause

This is a contractual dispute concerning the enforceability of a non-competition clause. The case falls under the intersection of contract law and employment law, specifically addressing restrictive covenants.

contract law employment contract non-competition restrictive covenants

M & P Drug Mart Inc. v. N.

2022 ONCA 398 (CanLII) · 2022-05-17

Non-Competition Covenant Unenforceable: Ambiguity & Overbreadth

The Court of Appeal for Ontario heard an appeal regarding the enforceability of a non-competition covenant in an employment agreement. The court applied the Shafron framework and found the covenant unreasonable and unenforceable due to ambiguity and overbreadth, as it extended beyond the employee's role as a pharmacist. The appeal was not dismissed as moot despite the covenant's expiration.

employment contract enforceability non-competition reasonableness restrictive covenants

Aware Ads Inc. v. W. et al

2021 ONSC 7452 (CanLII) · 2021-11-10

Interim Injunction Denied: Restrictive Covenants

This is an interlocutory motion for an interim injunction brought by an employer against former employees who allegedly breached restrictive covenants by competing and soliciting clients. The court dismissed the motion for interim injunction, finding insufficient evidence to establish a strong prima facie case or irreparable harm, particularly regarding the misuse of confidential information and the enforceability of the non-competition clause.

confidential information employment contract interim injunction non-competition restrictive covenants

M. Gibbons Venture Ltd. v. K.

2021 ONSC 6001 (CanLII) · 2021-09-09

Non-Competition Clause Enforceability

This is a contractual dispute concerning restrictive covenants and non-competition clauses in an employment context. The case addresses the enforceability of non-competition agreements between an employer and an employee.

contract law employment contract non-competition restrictive covenants

UAP Inc. v. Y.

2021 ONSC 5065 (CanLII) · 2021-07-19

Interlocutory Injunction: Enforcing Non-Compete Clauses

This interlocutory motion seeks an injunction to enforce restrictive covenants, including non-competition and non-solicitation clauses, against former employees and other defendants. The court must determine if there is a strong prima facie case of breach based on circumstantial evidence and whether the balance of convenience favors granting the injunction under the RJR-MacDonald test.

employment contract interlocutory injunction non-competition restrictive covenants rjr-macdonald

S.I. Systems Partnership v. G.

2020 ONSC 8086 (CanLII) · 2020-12-23

Non-Compete Enforceability in Consulting Agreements

This case addresses the enforceability of non-competition clauses in consulting agreements between an IT service provider and its consultants. The court found the clauses unenforceable due to unreasonable breadth, lack of geographical and project-specific limitations, and failure to demonstrate proprietary interest. Consequently, the plaintiff's claims for breach of contract and inducing breach of contract were dismissed, with only nominal damages awarded due to a lack of evidence of financial harm.

breach of contract consulting agreement enforceability non-competition restrictive covenants

F. v. Aphria Inc.

2020 ONCA 403 (CanLII) · 2020-06-23

F. v. Aphria: Stock Options & Non-Compete Interpretation

An appeal concerning the interpretation of stock option agreements and a non-competition agreement between a former employee and their employer. The Court of Appeal for Ontario addressed whether specific terms in the stock option grant took precedence over general plan terms, the denial of relief from forfeiture due to a breach of the non-competition agreement, and the appropriate assessment of damages based on share prices.

contract interpretation damages non-competition relief from forfeiture stock options

Camino Modular Systems Inc. v. K.

2019 ONSC 7437 (CanLII) · 2019-12-16

Enforceability of Restrictive Covenants in Employment

This is an interlocutory proceeding concerning the enforceability of restrictive covenants in an employment agreement. The court examined whether non-competition, non-solicitation, and confidentiality clauses were reasonable and protected proprietary interests, finding them overly broad, vague, or indefinite. Additionally, the court addressed the admissibility of evidence regarding alleged misuse of confidential information and the test for granting an injunction.

confidentiality employment contract injunction non-competition restrictive covenants

C. v. CEO Global Network Inc.

2019 ONSC 3589 (CanLII) · 2019-06-10

Consulting Agreement: Non-Compete Void, Damages Awarded

This case concerns a dispute over a consulting agreement involving non-competition and confidentiality provisions. The court found the non-competition provision void for unreasonableness and determined that any breach by the plaintiff was immaterial. The defendant failed to establish just cause for termination, resulting in an award of damages to the plaintiff.

confidentiality consulting agreement damages non-competition termination without cause

Quarterback Transportation Inc. v Traffix Group Inc.

2018 ONSC 2668 (CanLII) · 2018-06-04

Non-Competition Agreements & Restrictive Covenants

An employment law case concerning the enforceability of non-competition agreements and restrictive covenants, involving a motion for injunctions.

employment contract injunction non-competition restrictive covenants

Advance Distribution Logistics International Inc. v. Highlight Motor Freight Inc.

2018 ONSC 948 (CanLII) · 2018-03-28

Employment Non-Compete Covenant & Injunction

This case involves a dispute over non-competition covenants and restrictive covenants within the context of contracts of employment. The primary legal issue concerns the enforceability of such clauses, with an injunction being sought as a remedy.

employment contract injunction non-competition restrictive covenants

United Rentals of Canada Inc. v B.

2016 ONSC 6854 (CanLII) · 2016-11-09

Non-Compete Unenforceable: Lack of Consideration

This case concerns the enforceability of a non-competition and non-solicitation agreement signed by an employee who alleged signing under threat of dismissal. The court found the agreement unenforceable due to lack of consideration, as continued employment did not constitute valid consideration, applying principles from Braiden v. La-Z-Boy and Holland v. Hostopia. The court also noted the clause was overly broad in its temporal and spatial scope, restricting the defendant from working within 100 km for 12 months.

consideration employment contract enforceability non-competition restrictive covenants

C. v. Irving H. Miller Limited

2016 ONSC 5570 (CanLII) · 2016-09-13

Insurance Broker Awarded 15 Months Notice

This wrongful dismissal case involved an insurance broker with 10 years of service who was terminated for alleged dishonesty and breach of duties. The court applied the McKinley framework to determine that the employer lacked just cause for summary dismissal and awarded the plaintiff 15 months' notice based on the Bardal factors. Additionally, the court addressed breaches of fiduciary duty and non-competition clauses, awarding the employer damages for lost commissions.

fiduciary duties just cause non-competition reasonable notice wrongful dismissal